The luminosity function of cluster galaxies. II. Data reduction procedures applied to the cluster Abell 496

:arXiv:astro-ph/9910017vl 1 Oct 1999:

A&A manuscript no.

(will be inserted by hand later)

Your thesaurus codes are:

missing; you have not inserted them

ASTRONOMY

AND
ASTROPHYSICS

The luminosity function of cluster galaxies. II. Data
reduction procedures applied to the cluster Abell 496

A. Moretti^ E. MoUnari^ G. Chincarini^ ^ g. De Grandi^

^ Osservatorio Astronomico di Brera, Via Bianclii 46, 1-22055 Merate, Italy
^ Universita degli Studi di Milano, via Celoria 16, 1-20133 Milano, Italy

submitted on 23-3-1999

Abstract. We initiated a large project aimed to estimate
the Luminosity Function of galaxies in clusters and to eval-
uate its relation to cluster morphology. With this paper
we deem necessary to outline the general procedures of the
data reduction and details of the data analysis. The clus-
ter sample includes the brightest southern ROSAT all-sky
survey clusters with z < 0.1. These have been observed
in three colours g, r, i, and mapped up to a few core
radii using a mosaic of CCD frames. E/SO galaxies in the
cluster core are singled out both by morphology (for the
brightest galaxies), and by colour. The details of the data
reduction procedure are illustrated via the analysis of the
cluster Abell 496, which has been used as a pilot clus-
ter for the whole program. The related photometric cat-
alogue consists of 2355 objects. The limiting magnitudes
(the reference Surface Brightness is given in parenthesis)
in the various colours are respectively g(25.5) = 24.14,
r(25.5) = 24.46, i(25.0) = 23.75. These correspond to
the limiting absolute magnitudes -12.28,-11.96 and -12.67
(iJo=50 km/sec/Mpc).

Key words: galaxies: photometry - galaxies: cluster: gen-
eral

1. Introduction

In 1993/1994 we started a long-range photometry program
on clusters of galaxies in order to estimate in detail the
cluster Luminosity Function (LF) and the morphology of
the brightest cluster galaxies. Our aim was to gain more
accurate knowledge on this topic both to better under-
stand formation and evolution, and to improve the com-
parison with numerical simulations. Straightforward sci-
entific drivers are at the basis of this investigation: the
Luminosity Function of cluster galaxies at present time
is the result of cluster initial formation and subsequent
evolution - taking into account internal phenomena and
external interactions.

* Based on observation carried out at ESO La Silla, Chile.
Send offprint requests to: moretti@nierate.mi.astro.it

It is reasonable, and to some extent expected, that
at formation the galaxy mass function is a universal con-
stant. In this case, assuming that every evolutionary pro-
cess keeps a constant M/L ratio, it would be reasonable to
expect a universal LF, even if it cannot be excluded that
evolution and richness might play a role on this stage.
Present day observing evidence is, however, that the mass
is organised into differently shaped and differently lumi-
nous galaxies - the galaxy population depending strongly
on the cluster density and morphology. It would be strange
if Nature, in the unfolding of this multivariate process,
could set to work such a fine-tuning as to maintain the
exact proportionality between mass and luminosity, even
assuming a universal initial mass function.

The assumption of a universal LF for all the clusters
(Colless 1989 and, more recently, Threntham 1997, 1998)
might therefore be too coarse of a tool for characterizing
the cluster population. Infall and ICM-galaxies interac-
tion might further perturb the shape of the LF during the
evolution of the cluster. In this respect it seemed of fun-
damental importance to evaluate the faint end of the LF.
Meanwhile, important work has been published on this
topic following the excellent papers on the Virgo Cluster
by Binggeli et al. (1988). Biviano et al. (1995) approached
the study by selecting a catalogue of bright galaxies in the
Coma cluster. Undoubtedly, this direct method is a sound
way to proceed, but the construction of a spectrophoto-
metric catalogue of a large number of rich clusters de-
mands an unaffordable amount of time with a 4 meter
class telescope.

Another very interesting photometric approach is that
of Bernstein et al. (1995), for the same Coma cluster,
where particular attention has been given to the faint end
of LF. In that work, however, the bright part remains ill-
defined.

A general consideration of the different studies is the
limited application of their results, often making it impos-
sible to compare directly the catalogue and Lfs. This led
us to build our consistent photometric catalogues.

In this paper we outline at first the selected sample:
other authors might be interested in this bookkeeping

Moretti et al.: Cluster galaxy LF. Data reduction.

(avoiding or comparing duplications) and it will help the
reader to follow our work to its the completion.

Secondly, we detail our observational strategy and
methods of data reduction, particularly in those points
where they differ from the standard analysis used in
the literature. They will then form a basic reference for
other papers in preparation. The observing strategies are
strongly related and tuned to the data analysis methods.
These procedures have first been applied to the cluster
Abell 496 (see also Molinari et al. 1998, paper I, for dis-
cussion on LF) , for which we publish here the photometry.

2. The Project

2.1. The sample

The sample has been selected from the catalogue given
in De Grandi et al. (1999) by choosing only clusters at
declination < 0°, with X-ray fluxes measured in the 0.5-
2.0 keV energy band larger than 10^^^ erg cm^^ s^^, and
with extended X-ray emission (i.e., sources with proba-
bility to be point-like, as computed by De Grandi et al.
1997, smaller than 1%). The resulting sample of 20 clusters
is reported in Table ^. Columns list the main X-ray and
optical properties for each source as follows: Column (1)
— Cluster name. Column (2) — X-ray position: J2000.0
right ascension (hh mm ss.s). Column (3) — X-ray po-
sition: J2000.0 declination (dd mm ss.s). Column (J^) —
Cluster red-shift. Column (5) — Unabsorbed X-ray flux

computed in the 0.5-2.0 keV band in units of 10^ erg
cm^^ s^^. Column (6) — Bautz- Morgan type. Column (7)
— Optical richness. Column (8) — Status of observations
(Obs.= observed)

2.2. Imaging

CCD observations of the sample clusters were carried out
since December 1994 at La Silla with the 1.5 m Danish
Telescope equipped with DFOSC camera. For each clus-
ter we observed a mosaic composed of 3 or 4 slightly over-
lapping fields (Fig. H shows the mosaic of Abell 496). In
each mosaic the centre of the first field corresponds to the
centre of the X-ray isophotes (see the Fig. 1 in Molinari
et al. 1998.). The other fields are centred along a radial
direction. For each mosaic, the typical total observed area
is 250 arcmin^ with a typical maximum angular distance
of 30 arcmin (equal to a linear distance of 2.5 Mpc at
z=0.05). For each cluster the observation of the most ex-
ternal field is used mainly to evaluate the background.
Each field is observed with the g, r, i filters of the Gunn
photometric system (Thuan & Gunn 1976, Wade et al.
1979). The spectral response is illustrated in Fig|^ along
with the observed spectrum of an elliptical galaxy. Obser-
vations of each field consist of 3600 s exposure as a result
of the integration of 4 x 900 s different exposures. Up to
date, we have collected photometric observations of 15 out
of 20 clusters of the sample (Table P . Spectroscopic obser-
vations are also being planned and will likely start shortly
before completion of the photometric sample. This paper
will deal, in particular, with the data analysis carried out
for the cluster Abell 496. However it reflects the method
we will also use for the other clusters.

[ -9 , - BM=I ■

■IM

■

6000
Wavelenghl (Angstrt

Fig. 1. The efficiency of the g, r, i filters as function of
the wavelength. In comparison, a typical early type galaxy
spectrum is superimposed at two different red-shifts: z=0
and z=0.12, the extremes of the catalogue redshift range.

Fig. 2. The observed field of the cluster Abell 496 with
the cD galaxy in the NE corner of the image. The mo-
saic is composed of 4 adjoining, and slightly overlapping
fields: their identification number (Table 0) increases mov-
ing from NE (field 0) to SO corner (field 3). The angular
distance between NE and SO corners is 30 arcmin.

4 Moretti et al.: Cluster galaxy LF. Data reduction.

Table 1. The sample. Data relative to X-ray flux and red-shift are from De Grand! et al. (1999). Data relative to
optical richness and morphology are from Abell et al. (1989). Data labelled with * are our estimate.

Name

Q2000

^2000

Redshift

Flux

B.M.

Rich.

Status

A0085

00h41m50.11s

-09dl8ml7.5s

0.05560

4.092!:^-^^5

I

2

Obs.

A0119

00h56ml 1.69s

-01dl4m52.5s

0.04420

2A06t°ofot

II-III

2

Obs.

A0133

01h02m42.21s

-21d52m43.5s

0.05660

1.578«:1«^

r

2

Obs.

A3158

03h42m53.06s

-53d37m43.0s

0.05910

2.250«:?»!

i-ii

2

-

A3186

03h52m25.09s

-74d01m02.5s

0.12700

1 041+°-^"

i-ii

1

Obs.

EXO0422-086

04h25m51.02s

-08d33m38.5s

0.03971

1.870+°-!?^

r

-

Obs.

A3266

04h30m58.82s

-61d27m52.5s

0.05890

3.001+°???

I

2

Obs.

A0496

04h33m37.07s

-13dl5m20.0s

0.03284

4.652t°:g^

I

1

Obs.

A3376

06h01m37.77s

-40d00m31.0s

0.04550

1.504«i«

I

1

-

A3391

06h26m20.10s

-53d41m44.5s

0.05310

1 Qiq+0.183

I

-

A3395

06h27m38.83s

-54d26m38.5s

0.04980

-1 ir,r,+0.289

i.iZZ_Q 209

I

3

Obs.

A3667

20hl2m35.08s

-56d50m30.5s

0.05560

3.289«:«-

II

2

Obs.

A3695

20h34m46.86s

-35d49m07.5s

0.08930

1.247t°-Ji^

I

2

Obs.

A3822

21h54ml0.21s

-57d52m05.5s

0.07590

1.099+°:??^

II-III

2

Obs.

A3827

22h01m58.85s

-59d57m37.0s

0.09840

1 c;i7+0-l''3
J^-OJ^' -0.160

I

2

-

A2420

22hl0m20.09s

-12dl0m49.0s

0.08380

-1 -, 79+0.240
J^-J^ '^-0.199

I

2

Obs.

A3921

22h50m03.61s

-64d26m30.0s

0.09360

1 oni +0-259
i./Ui_Q 226

II

2

Obs.

RX-J2344.2-422

23h44ml5.98s

-04d22m24.5s

0.07860

1 914+0.302
J^-^J^^-0.232

r

-

-

A4038

23h47m41.78s

-28d08m26.5s

0.02920

9 yr -I +0.232
Z.(Oi_Q 221

III

2

Obs.

A4059

23h57m00.02s

-34d45m24.5s

0.04600

1 074+0.189
-■-•^'^-0.178

I

1

Obs.

3. Abell 496 image processing

Abell 496 is a class 1 rich cluster, Bautz Morgan type
I (Abell et al. 1989), dominated by a single central cD
galaxy, MGC -02-12-039 (aaooo = 4''33'37.7", .^sooo =
-13°15'43.2", z=0.032). The peak of the X-ray emission
lies inside the core of the cD galaxy (Table |]). CCD ob-
servations of the cluster were carried out during the first
observing run from 24 to 27 December 1994. The effec-
tive field of the DFOSC camera and Thomson THX 31156
CCD is 8.68 X 8.68 arcmin with a single pixel correspond-
ing to 0.508 arsec . The total area of the observed field is
224 arcmin^ for each filter (Fig.g). We list the journal of
the observations in Table g.

3.1. Flat-fielding and magnitude calibration

Basic data reduction, including bias subtraction, fiat-field
correction, magnitude calibration and cosmic rays sub-
traction, is done using the ESO-MIDAS software environ-
ment.

For each filter we build two different flat-field frames.
For the first we use the dithering method to obtain the
flat field frame directly from scientific exposures (see for
example Molinari et al. 1996). The second fiat field frame
is built using the median of the distribution of the sunset
and twilight sky images. We obtain the minimum value
of the ratio noise/sky, at both small and big scales in the
frames, using the first flat-fielding procedure for filter i.
For the g and r filters we adopt the average between the
two different fiat-field frames, since this gives the min-

Fig. 3. The calibration straight line for filter r. For each
of the three standard star, the typical uncertainty on the
offset measure is 0.02 magnitude. Moreover, the 3 differ-
ent average offset values show a linear dependence on the
colour of the star. By the linear fit, we extrapolate the
offset value corresponding to g — r = 0.

imum rms. After the reduction, the typical rms of the
sky is 1.5%, 1%, 0.75% of the background for the g, r,
i frames, respectively. Cosmic rays are identified by their
appearance in only one of the dithered images. The stars
observed as standard are selected in the photometric sys-
tem of Thuan & Gunn (1976) and are listed in Table pi
The offset of the calibration is measured as the difference
between instrumental magnitude (as measured with the
g,r,i filters at ESO telescope) and the magnitude of the
standard stars. In spite of the fact that we evaluate a

Moretti et al.: Cluster galaxy LF. Data reduction.

Table 2. The journal of observations. The Date, Univer-
sal Time, air mass, exposure time, and seeing for each
frame are shown. In each frame seeing is calculated as the
FWHM of the stars.

Table 3. Standard stars used for calibration.

Object

Filter Date

U.T.

airmass

E.T.

Seeing

fioldO

g 25-12-94

1:54

1.071

900s.

1.25

2:48

1.040

1.25

3:41

1.060

'

1.50

4:33

1.133

1.50

r

1:37

1.092

1.25

3:05

1.041

1.25

3:24

1.048

'

1.50

4:50

1.171

1.50

1

2:12

1.054

1.25

2:31

1.044

'

1.25

3:58

1.077

'

1.50

4:16

1.102

'

1.50

fioldl

g 26-12-94

1:45

1.076

1.50

2:14

1.050

'

1.50

3:41

1.063

'

1.15

4:06

1.093

1.15

r

1:12

1.128

1.50

2:32

1.042

1.50

3:24

1.050

'

1.15

4:23

1.121

1.15

1

1:28

1.100

1.50

2:50

1.039

'

1.50

3:07

1.042

'

1.15

4:40

1.157

'

1.15

fiGld2

g 27-12-94

1:21

1.105

1.30

5:04

1.233

'

1.35

5:22

1.298

'

1.35

28-12-94

1:49

1.064

1.25

r 27-12-94

1:05

1.134

'

1.30

4:47

1.184

1.35

5:39

1.372

'

1.35

28-12-94

1:32

1.083

1.25

i 27-12-94

1:38

1.080

1.30

1:56

1.061

1.30

28-12-94

0:58

1.140

1.25

1:16

1.106

'

1.25

fiGld3

g 28-12-94

2:14

1.046

900s.

1.25

4:11

1.114

'

1.50

5:35

1.371

1.50

5:52

1.462

500s.

1.50

r

2:31

1.040

900s.

1.25

4:28

1.147

'

1.50

5:18

1.297

'

1.50

6:04

1.538

600s.

1.50

i

2:48

1.040

900s.

1.25

4:45

1.189

1.50

5:02

1.240

'

1.50

6:15

1.618

600s.

1.50

relation between the colour of the standard star and the
magnitude off-set, we decided not to account for the colour
relation due to the paucity of the data and the possibil-
ity of systematic errors. Most importantly, we could not
apply the colour correction to galaxies which have been
detected only in one or two filters (40% of the sample).
Choosing the best compromise, we applied in all cases the
magnitude correction equivalent to g — r = 0. Because of
this assumption, our photometric data differ slightly from
the photometric Gunn system (typically 0.1 magnitude for
an object with g-r=l ). The colours we measure, however,
match very well the Gunn system, because the slopes of
the calibration straight lines in the three filters are similar.

Name

aigso iSigso

g r %

HD 84937

Ross 683

BD -15°6290

09 46 12.1 +13 59 17.0
08 47 46.6 +07 49 08.0
22 50 37.5 -14 31 42.0

8.325 8.383 8.43
11.40 11.08
10.754 9.544 8.334

Table 4. k correction (Buzzoni 1995) and galactic extinc-
tion (Burstein & Heiles 1982) values used for the E/SO
galaxies in Abell 496.

filter

9 r I

k corr.
gal. ext.

0.02 0.01 0.01
0.07 0.04 0.03

3.2. Object search and analysis

Automatic object detection and magnitude evaluation
have been done by using the INVENTORY package (West
& Kruszewski 1981) implemented in the MIDAS environ-
ment. Galaxies of the sample span a very large range in
magnitude from the magnitude limit (mag '^ 24, see next
section) to the isophotal magnitude (mag ^ 13) of the cD
central galaxy. This range corresponds to a comparable
range in the size of the galaxies. It varies from the PSF
limit (~ 3 pixels) to the isophotal radius of the cD galaxy
(~ 100 pixels). Because of this inherent heterogeneity, the
sample is not perfectly suitable for automatic search and
analysis of the sources. In particular, we must separate the
signal of very extended objects from the rest of the image
to avoid the problem of multiple detection. The procedure
we use is composed of the following three points. First,
we model and subtract the light of the most extended
objects. Second, we apply the INVENTORY standard re-
search and analysis procedure to frames in which the re-
maining objects are comparable in size. Finally, we apply
the INVENTORY analysis routine to the single-object im-
ages of the modelled and rebuilt extended objects. Here
we describe only the first point of the procedure which
is the original part. We model and rebuild the extended
sources, typically giant elliptical galaxies, with a proce-
dure similar to the one described by Molinari et al.(1996).
We improved their algorithm by making it more flexible.
First, for each distance from the centre of the galaxy, the
algorithm analyses the azimuthal intensity profile along
the circular paths (see the left panel in Fig. m. The pro-
jection of an elliptical isophote on the circular paths yields
a periodic variation of surface brightness, as shown in the
panel A of the Fig.H. It corresponds to the intensity profile
along the circular path marked on the left panel of Fig.H.
The maxima correspond to the intersections of the circu-
lar path with the major semi-axis of the isophote. Then
the algorithm fits the profile using a Fourier series and
a low-pass filter. This procedure eliminates the physical
and geometrical high frequency noise due to the discrete

Moretti et al.: Cluster galaxy LF. Data reduction.

1300 1350 1400
UORLD COORDINATE

1300 1350

UORLD COORDINATE

Fig. 4. Isophotes of the cD galaxy of Abell 496 from the raw image (left panel), and from the rebuilt model (right
panel). The coordinate refer to the pixels of the image:l pixel — 0.508 arsec. In the left panel the circular path at 24
pixel radius is marked; the intensity profile along this path is reported in the panel A of Fig.@. The model is built
using raw data where possible and fit value when an external object is superimposed on the line of sight.

nature of the CCD pixel grid. Finally, we calculate the dis-
tribution of the differences between the data and the fit:
we exclude from the profile the points whose intensity is
greater than 3 times the standard deviation of the distri-
bution (Figjl, panel B). Those points are replaced by the
exact fit values. By iterating a few times the procedure,
we can separate the signals of the superimposed sources
(Fig.o panels C), without any assumption on the shape of
the isophotes. We also made the algorithm more flexible
by introducing other geometrical parameters. In particu-
lar, we allow for the exclusion of selected angular profiles
intervals from the calculation of the Fourier coefficient of
the trigonometric series. Intervals to be excluded are se-
lected by visual inspection. The exclusion option is useful
when two objects of comparable size overlap and have very
close intensity maxima. In this way, we can rebuild the hid-
den isophothes assuming a central symmetry. In Fig.^ we
compare the isophotes of the raw image of the cD galaxy
(left panel) with the rebuilt model (right panel). The re-
built model is then subtracted from the original frame to
keep the photometric analysis of very extended sources
separated.

Although time-consuming (due to its interactiveness),
this procedure yields accurate photometric measurements
of both the extended and small sources. The described
procedure, in fact, allows the complete photometric anal-
ysis of the surface brightness of the extracted objects (see
Sect 5.1 for the Abell 496 cD). Contrary to other popular
automated programs (e.g. SExtractor, Bertin & Arnout
1996), we do not assign a pixel and its value to a unique

object, but partition the flux in each pixel among the dif-
ferent objects detected. Thus the isophotes are recovered
in their shape and intensity for all sources.

4. The catalogue of Abell 496

4.1- Isophotal magnitude definition

To define properly an isophotal magnitude we first need to
consider some definitions and correlations (see also Tren-
tham 1997).

4.1.1. Isophotal versus total magnitude

The difference between total and isophotal magnitude is
the difference between the total flux, extrapolation of the
curve of growth, and the flux integrated within a flxed SB
value. To simulate such difference, we extract from the
frames some bright sources {^ magnitude 16) of differ-
ent morphological types and integrate the total flux on
an extrapolated model. We then increase the magnitude
up to our frame limits by dividing the original flux by
a numerical coefflcient. In this way, we obtain a list of
expected total magnitudes in the range of interest. We
compare these values with the isophotal magnitudes as
measured by the analysis routine with the threshold listed
below. The amplitude of the differences is dependent on
the source profile. In our data at r '^ 24 the differences
range from 0.1 mag for point like sources to few tenth of
mag for E0/E6 galaxies and, little more than a magni-
tude for disk dominated objects (Fig.^ shows the case of

Moretti et al.: Cluster galaxy LF. Data reduction.

300 300

AZmUTHAL COORDINATE {degree)

Fig. 5. Steps of the modelling procedure. A. The raw ellip-
tical isophote is projected on a circular path. The profile
shown here corresponds to the 24 pixel radius of the cD
galaxy of Abell 496 as shown with a marked line in the
left panel of Fig.^. The azimuthal coordinate has the zero
point toward the right of the image, and it increases coun-
terclockwise. The periodic shape of period tt of the profile
is evident: the two maxima are at 90 and 270 degrees,
corresponding to the intersections between the path and
the major axis of the elliptical isophotes (see Figjj). The
profile of a superimposed source is evident at 30 degrees
as a departure from the periodic shape. We can find the
superimposed object along the path marked in Fig^ at
30 degrees from the point of the azimuthal coordinate.
The high frequency noise in the profile shape is due both
to Poissonian and geometrical noises. B. Fit procedure is
performed repeatedly excluding step by step the exter-
nal object identified at 3 a. C. When an external object
is identified, the extended object is rebuilt using the fit
value. Otherwise, the profile is left untouched.

an elliptical-r^' ^-galaxy). The difference is seeing depen-
dent. To show the independence we convolve the original
frames (seeing~ 1.3 arsec) with a Gaussian point spread
function to simulate worse seeing (1.6 arsec). The effect is
illustrated in FigJ|.

4.1.2. Dependence on the seeing

To reach internal consistency on frames obtained with dif-
ferent seeing we must correct the isophotal magnitudes for
the seeing of each frame. Our approach is as follows. We
choose not to apply directly any correction to the isopho-
tal magnitude, but, varying the value of the SB of the last

■

ELLIPT. GAL.

X

WORSE SEEING

n

AFTER GORR.

it

TRUE MAGNITUDE

Fig. 6. The differences between the isophotal magnitude
and the total magnitude of an elliptical galaxy (seeing=1.3
arsec) are plotted (filled squares) versus the total magni-
tude. Dashed line and crosses show the feature of the same
elliptical galaxy with an artificially degraded seeing (1.6
arsec). Open squares show the seeing-degraded galaxy af-
ter the correction performed according to the relationship
seeing-threshold.

isophote as a function of the seeing of the frame, we ensure
that the isophotal magnitude value of a fixed morpholog-
ical type always corresponds to the same fraction of the
total flux of the source. The procedure is easily justified.
Consider, for simplicity, a source with a Gaussian spatial
brightness profile: in this case different seeing levels cor-
respond to different values of the standard deviation a
(Fig.0) and the problem has a simple analytical solution.
Let us consider a bidimensional symmetric Gaussian pro-
file /i with a — ai; given the threshold Si we have to
consider the flux J- subtended by /i from to ri, such
that /i(ri) = El :

T =

1

e 2<T^ 2'Krdr

After the integration, we can write it as function of Ei

J^ = I - 2TialT.i .

Therefore given a different a — a2 (and the same normal-
ization), the same isophotal flux J- is obtained using the
threshold E2 such that

S2 = C-^f Si

(72

(1)

We conventionally assume a limit surface brightness value
as threshold in a frame with a certain seeing value and
we use the relationship (1) to find the correct threshold
in the other frames. The reference values of the limiting
isophote SB are 25.5, 25.5, 25.0 mag/arsec^ for g, r, i
filters, respectively with PSF=1.3 arsec.

Moretti et al.: Cluster galaxy LF. Data reduction.

El

[

A \
h \

I K

/

J

\ ,

/ \
/ \
/ \

E2

[\

\^

Fig. 7. The two Gaussian profiles simulate the same ob-
ject observed with different PSF. The profiles are the pro-
jections of two bidimensional profiles with the same nor-
malization and different FWHM. The marked areas repre-
sent the same quantity of flux. They represent the isopho-
tal fluxes with different thresholds at two different seeing
levels. According to equation (1), the second threshold S2
is chosen in a such a way that the isophotal flux of the left
profile is kept constant.

The relation (1) has been deduced in the case of Gaus-
sian profile source. We find that the corrections drawn
from (1) give good results also for different morphologi-
cal types as shown in Figs, o and & In Fig. o we show, in
the case of an elliptical-r^/^ galaxy, the difference between
isophotal and true magnitude at two different seeing lev-
els (one artificially degraded) , and the difference after the
correction. At low luminosity the correction substantially
removes the seeing dependence.

The quality of the correction discussed above can
be tested in the intersection regions of two overlapping
frames, which have been obtained in different seeing con-
ditions. In this region we have 2 different measures per-
formed with different seeing of a list of sources of random
magnitude and morphological type. For the differences be-
tween the 2 independent measures, we expect a symmet-
ric distribution with a dispersion exponentially increasing
with the magnitude due to the Poissonian uncertainty. If
we remove this dependence by normalizing by an expo-
nential factor, we expect a Gaussian distribution. In Fig.
^ we can observe that the distribution of the measures
performed with the same threshold is slightly asymmet-
ric; after adopting the threshold corrected according the
relation (1) we find that the distribution of differences is
perfectly symmetric as a test of riliability of the method
described.

J^.2. Sample completeness

Background statistical variations and source crowding
may affect the accuracy of the automatic detection rou-
tine and the completeness of the photometric catalogue.

MAGNITUDE (

Fig. 8. The distribution of the differences between 2 mea-
sures with different seeing (1.3 arcsec vs 1.4 arcsec ) of 75
sources after the correction. The distribution of the differ-
ences of the measures before the correction is shown with
the solid line and it is slightly asymmetric. The dashed line
shows the symmetric distribution after the correction.

We use a bootstrapping technique to test the sensitivity of
our results to both factors. First, we extract the image of a
giant elliptical galaxy from one of the frames. Then, divid-
ing by a numerical coefficient, we generate a set of more
than 30 different images for each filter in the relevant range
of isophotal magnitudes: 16.07 < r < 24.56, 15.86 < g <
24.85, 15.87 < i < 24.01. The test images are added to
the observed frames positioned at 25 subsequent distances
from the centre of the cluster (assumed to be in the cen-
tre of cD galaxy). For each value of the distance from the
centre and magnitude, we repeat this procedure 100 times
in each filter, randomly changing the angular coordinate
of the added test image. These 100 repetitions are divided
in small groups in different runs to avoid bias due to arti-
ficial additional crowding. This allows us to estimate the
probability of detecting a galaxy of magnitude m at dis-
tance r from the centre of the cluster P(r,m). For each
P(r, m) we estimate the uncertainty by the binomial dis-
tribution Pb [a;, 100, P(r, to)], which gives the probability
of observing x successes on 100 attempts given a probabil-
ity P{r, m) for a single success. At a fixed distance r from
the centre we find a 100 % detection rate for bright galax-
ies, and a drop in the rate at characteristic magnitude
~ TO-o (Fig. H). The analytical formula of this function,
given by a fit performed with a Fermi function is:

P{r^ m)

1

1

We also find that toq depends on the distance r. Smaller
radii are associated with brighter ttiq . The relationship can
be parameterized by an hyperbole

r

Moretti et al.: Cluster galaxy LF. Data reduction.

»*t

r=SOpxls m0=23. 5
r=200pxls n\0 = Z4. 25

flPPflRENT MftGNITUDE

Fig. 9. Bootstrap results at two different distances from
tfie centre of the cD galaxy are shown. The two different
curves are fitted by Fermi-Dirac function with different
value of the characteristic magnitude toq- Going off centre
Too increases: at fixed magnitude, finding a faint galaxy is
easier. The uncertainty of the test results is estimate by
binomial statistic and 1 a level is shown in the figure.

where A and B are slightly different for the 3 filters. As we
expect, this relation is affected by background statistical
variation and sources crowding. The first steep increase of
Too is due to crowding effect of the central part of the clus-
ter and to the cD halo. The flat shape near an asymptotic
value is due to the statistical variations in the background
noise. The asymptotic value of toq corresponds to 50% de-
tection probability independently of any crowding effect
and for each filter we assume it as the limiting magni-
tude value of the catalogue (24.14, 24.46, 23.75, for filter
g, r, i respectively). The test is performed on the raw
image, without the exclusion of the bright, extended ob-
jects. Indeed, we stress that subtracting the signal from
extended sources (see previous section) does not substan-
tially improve the automatic routine detection capability
of faint galaxies.

Table 5. By using function P{r,m), we can estimate our
sample completeness. Here we give the completeness value
of the last three-lmagnitude bin for each filter.

App. mag. bin

^bs. mag. bin

Compl. (%)

filter g

[23.14, 24.14]
22.14, 23.14
21.14, 22.14

-12.39, -11.39
-13.39, -12.39
-14.39, -13.39

(.7+4. b
95+^i

filter r

23.46, 24.46
22.46, 23.46
21.46, 22.46

-12.07, -11.07
-13.07, -12.07
-14.07, -13.07

68-1:?
99+":^

filter i

22.75, 23.75
21.75, 22.75
20.75, 21.75

-12.79, -11.79
-13.79, -12.79
-14.79, -13.79

71 +4. a

'-■--4.6

4-. 3. Stars and galaxies

We identify and remove foreground bright stars from the
catalogue by using the isophotal magnitude-isophotal ra-
dius plane (fig.[lO|). In this plane there is a clear distinc-
tion between two different populations of sources up to the
magnitude r ~ 20.75: within this range stars have smaller
isophotal radius than galaxies at any given magnitude. We

;

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1

i"^

X;;:

-

■ vl ■

-

■^

'''^'^^m^^^^

-

,^^^

'^**r--, '

14 16 16 30 32 24

ISOPHOTAL MAGNITUDE (r)

Fig. 10. The isophotal magnitude-isophotal radius plane:
we can easily identify 279 bright stars up to r=20.75. At
fainter magnitudes our data do not allow us to classify
morphologically the sources of our sample. The continuous
line mark the separation between the star and the galaxy
fields.

cannot classify fainter stars morphologically. Their identi-
fication from our data can be achieved only in a statistical
way by estimating the contamination level of our sample.
In the bright part of the catalogue (14.0 < mag. < 20.75)
we identify 279 stars. In the remaining part of the cata-
logue, we expect to have 290 foreground faint stars (Table
^), about 15% of the total of faint sources (Robin et al.
1995). The star contamination level falls under 10% if we
limit our analysis to the "sequence" galaxies sample (see
next section).

Table 6. Number of faint, unclassified, stars expected
within our catalogue, divided into 1 magnitude bins. First
row refers to the whole sample, second row refers to "se-
quence" colours. The last column reports ratios between
stars and galaxies: contamination level of the whole sam-
ple is about 15%, whereas sequence galaxies contamina-
tion is under 10%.

MAG

21.25 22.25 23.25 24.25

TOTAL

stars
stars

56 75 94 65
13 7 13 14

290/1867
47/530

10

Moretti et al.: Cluster galaxy LF. Data reduction.

4-. 4- Error estimate

The Poissonian uncertainty is the largest source of error in
our photometric measurements and can be estimated by
comparing independent magnitude measurements of the
same objects. In our sample, we have independent pho-
tometric measurements of the objects belonging to the
intersections of two adjoining fields. As shown in Table 0,
they represent a statistically significant subsample.

Table 7. Number of objects belonging to the intersection
of different fields.

Filter

g r i

Field 1 n Field
Field 1 n Field 2

91 141 128
95 126 107

Starting from the Poissonian statistics, due to the er-
rors propagation law, for the magnitude uncertainty, we
expect

cr(m) = constl0°-2" ,

where the constant is given by the characteristics of the
electronics. At magnitude 22 we estimate that the uncer-
tainty of the photometric measures 1722 is 0.20, 0.19, 0.22
magnitude for filter g, r, i respectively. Then, for each
magnitude m we can draw am as

CT{m) = a22 10°-2(™-22) ,

which is the uncertainty of our photometric measures as
function of the magnitude.

30

MAGHITUDE (p)

Fig. 11. Differences between r magnitude measurements
of the same objects performed from two frames. Plotted
against magnitude, they show the expected exponential
slope. 1 and 2 am level curves are shown.

15

a

s

so

S5

BLUE ZONE

Fig. 12. We split up the plane in three different regions on
the basis of the Colour-Magnitude Relation. Using Met-
calfe et al.(1994) terminology the three regions are defined
as the "blue" , "the sequence" and the "red" . We identify
637 galaxies within the sequence zone (little squares), 371
in the red zone and 47 in the blue one. The filled circle at
r ~ 13 refers to cD galaxy isophotal magnitude and core
index colour (see next subsection).

4-5. Description of the catalogue

The derived catalogue consists of 2355 objects: 2076 are
classified as galaxies, 956 galaxies have magnitude mea-
sures in all three filters, 1081, 2055, 1500 galaxies have
magnitude values below the filter g, r, i limit, respectively.
We estimate g-r colours of 1058 galaxies and g-i of 955
galaxies. The whole catalogue is available in electronic
form (tittp://www.merate. mi. astro. it/^molinari/A496
cat.datp, while in Table p| the list of the 40 brightest

galaxies is reported, and in Table M we summarise the
statistics of the catalogue of galaxies. In the different
columns we list:

— (1) ID number of the object;

— (2) EAST and SOUTH coordinates, in arseconds, with
respect to the centre of the cD galaxy;

— (3) g, r, i isophotal magnitudes, each computed down
to the threshold quoted in the previous section;

— (4) g, r, i isophotal radius;

— (5) g-r and g-i colours index computed through a 1.5,
3 or 5 pixel aperture photometry, depending on the
computed r isophotal radius;

— (6) classification of the object as star or galaxy.

Moretti et al.: Cluster galaxy LF. Data reduction.

11

Table 8. A subsample of the photometric catalogue (http://www.mcratc. mi. astro. it/^^molinari/ A496-cat.dat) report-
ing the 40 brightest objects in the complete list is presented. The luminosity sorting has been made in the r filter.
The ID number refers to the position in the whole catalogue.

ID

X

y

g

r

i

Rg

Rr

Ri

g-r

g-i

note

1429

-652.6

419.8

15.22

14.70

14.54

32.0

35.0

31.0

0.50

0.68

star

661

-553.3

23.8

15.41

14.84

14.71

36.0

40.0

34.0

0.61

0.76

star

2251

-856.6

939.4

14.81

14.87

14.87

13.5

14.9

12.2

-0.17

-0.10

1525

-292.9

501.1

15.79

15.13

14.95

11.6

13.6

12.3

0.66

0.83

1061

-640.4

193.7

15.66

15.15

15.25

12.0

15.0

11.7

0.47

0.33

748

-272.2

55.5

15.83

15.30

15.17

26.0

29.0

25.0

0.52

0.65

star

249

-240.6

-146.6

15.89

15.34

15.29

26.0

29.0

25.0

0.56

0.60

star

1448

-286.8

440.7

15.99

15.44

15.32

31.0

37.0

30.0

0.50

0.68

star

968

-631.8

152.6

15.98

15.48

15.42

32.0

34.0

29.0

0.50

0.58

star

114

-587.8

-198.7

16.15

15.69

15.55

27.0

30.0

27.0

0.43

0.61

star

935

47.3

138.5

16.27

15.76

15.59

18.0

20.0

19.0

0.54

0.71

star

1543

-437.4

514.5

16.11

15.80

15.80

11.0

11.6

9.9

0.33

0.33

573

-149.6

-22.6

16.19

15.83

15.81

10.1

10.6

10.3

0.43

0.43

1365

-418.3

373.6

16.58

15.99

15.87

20.0

21.0

18.0

0.64

0.79

star

113

159.7

-199.1

16.61

16.08

15.89

17.0

19.0

18.0

0.55

0.74

star

2257

-1077.9

942.2

16.32

16.12

16.18

9.9

10.4

9.0

0.19

0.16

355

-61.8

-107.4

16.50

16.18

16.18

9.7

10.0

9.2

0.35

0.32

387

-25.6

-93.0

16.81

16.27

16.10

14.0

17.0

15.0

0.55

0.73

star

632

56.8

8.0

16.91

16.38

16.19

12.2

13.6

12.9

0.56

0.74

star

71

-186.1

-217.7

17.81

16.42

15.35

7.4

9.7

11.8

1.43

2.47

480

-25.9

-60.0

16.92

16.44

16.18

12.0

15.0

14.0

0.46

0.72

star

1919

-922.3

681.2

17.49

16.56

16.28

8.1

10.4

9.5

0.91

1.24

1200

-339.8

251.2

17.12

16.58

16.52

17.0

19.0

16.0

0.53

0.62

star

1280

-482.8

304.7

17.74

16.59

15.89

7.8

9.3

9.6

1.18

1.89

1522

-633.1

496.8

16.96

16.61

16.58

20.0

20.0

17.0

0.41

0.50

star

1006

-77.7

175.2

16.81

16.62

16.65

9.0

9.3

8.8

0.25

0.19

2032

-1078.6

771.6

17.44

16.63

16.44

7.8

9.3

8.5

0.79

1.01

781

-236.8

69.3

16.96

16.69

16.72

8.8

9.3

8.4

0.22

0.19

2308

-908.9

987.2

17.83

16.70

15.97

7.1

9.5

9.6

1.10

1.87

1511

-420.9

489.4

17.24

16.70

16.61

20.0

22.0

19.0

0.52

0.67

star

982

-135.0

159.3

17.88

16.74

16.06

7.1

9.0

9.9

1.15

1.81

1082

-629.4

200.5

17.12

16.76

16.60

19.0

20.0

18.0

0.37

0.51

star

925

131.5

132.0

17.31

16.76

16.61

15.0

17.0

16.0

0.55

0.70

star

901

-516.1

121.2

17.14

16.78

16.77

8.7

9.5

8.5

0.34

0.34

826

-67.3

90.6

17.30

16.80

16.62

12.0

13.0

13.0

0.50

0.68

star

981

-360.6

159.0

17.24

16.86

16.85

8.7

9.3

8.2

0.32

0.33

1604

-1083.8

545.4

17.86

16.87

16.52

7.7

10.1

8.9

0.95

1.34

130

-68.4

-189.4

18.00

16.90

16.32

6.9

9.0

9.7

1.09

1.67

2082

-897.2

812.4

17.13

16.93

16.96

8.6

8.9

7.6

0.17

0.22

478

-580.7

-60.5

17.40

16.97

16.95

8.2

9.2

7.9

0.39

0.41

5. Abell 496 photometric properties

In this section we analyse the general properties of the
cluster. We examine closely the following points. First, by
means of the Colour-Magnitude Relation, we select the
main, early type, component of the cluster population.
Second, we estimate the projected spatial distribution of
the different types of galaxies and we measure the core
radius of the cluster as tracked by bright galaxies. Third,
we analyze the photometric properties of the cD central
galaxy. Fourth, we study the distribution of galaxy colour
as function of their position within the cluster core.

5.1. The colours of the galaxies

On the r /{g — r) plane (Fig. n3) we emphasize the nar-
row sequence of the linear Colour-Magnitude Relation
(CMR): the sequence defines the locus of early type
galaxies of the cluster within the plane (Visvanathan &
Sandage,1977, Arimoto & Yoshii,1987). The continuous
line is determined by fitting the locus of points as defined
by elliptical galaxies brighter than magnitude 18, exclud-
ing the cD galaxy. The equation derived by the best fit

CMR{r) = -0.025 r + 0.914

12

Moretti et al.: Cluster galaxy LF. Data reduction.

1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1

-

*

■■"*-;■ ■

- RED

GALAXIES

■ \ '

'

-

-

°°'^^

L.

"at,

'y:^

03

^y'

- -^--^ :

E

- BRIGHT SEQUENCE \ -

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~

COLOS(g-L)

COLOR (g-i)

- -

° rft.

T^

"v.

ao

^yi

K

S

X,-^ ;

E

- BLUE GALAXIES \ -

"

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

-■.'■..■■

^

■'^fe^.-

00

■ ■.-."^^v--

1^

; x^ ;

E

SEQUENCE \ -

- ^, ,-

COLOH(g-l)

COLOR ( J!- i)

Fig. 13. Colour-colour planes. Our data are superimposed on the expected colours of elliptical galaxies at different
red-shifts: each cross on the continue line represents a 0.05 red-shift variation. The filled square represents the cD
galaxy, perfectly placed on the theoretical path at red-shift 0.03. Redder galaxies show expected colours of elliptical
galaxies at higher red-shift. Sequence galaxies are slightly bluer than cD galaxy with dispersion increasing with the
magnitude (see fig.ljt) Finally, blue galaxies have colours unmatchable with the early type galaxy colours.

Table 9. Statistics of the catalogue of galaxies; 279 clas-
sified bright stars are included in the catalogue, but not in
the present summary table. At faint magnitudes (> 20.75)
we expect 15% of the entries are foreground stars. In
parentheses absolute magnitude limits are reported as-
suming iyo=50 km/sec/Mpc.

Skill

Min.

Max

Gal. enters

52000

-13°32'24"

-13°11'26"

2077

02000

4''32'48"

4''33'49"

2077

mag. g

12.64 (-22.93)

24.14 (-12.28)

1081

mag. r

12.04 (-22.62)

24.47 (-11.96)

2055

mag. i

11.88 (-22.55)

23.75 (-12.67)

1500

col. g-r

-0.50

1.98

1059

col. g-i

-0.61

3.28

956

lar to the estimates given by Garilli et al. (1996). The cD
galaxy fits quite nicely the locus of the elliptical galaxies
and the CMR relation.

Several authors have used the CMR to define cluster
members (Metcalfe et al. 1994; Biviano et al., 1995; Seeker,
1996; Lopez-Cruz et al. 1997; De Propris & Pritchet, 1998;
Molinari & Smareglia, 1998) since, by so doing, the con-
tamination, due to the background galaxies, is largely re-
duced. Given the analytical formula of the linear rela-
tion CMR{r), determined above, we define the "sequence
zone" as the colour-magnitude plane region inside the
curves

{g - r){r) = CMR{r) ± {-^ (Jgigf + ar{rf + 0.06)

has been extrapolated to the limiting magnitude of the
frame. The slope of the CMR is consistent with that es-
timated by Visvanathan & Sandage (1977) for the Virgo
cluster (see their table 1 and Fig. 1 and 2) and very simi-

where we take into account photometric uncertainty at \a
level (see section 4.4) and the inherent dispersion of the
relation (estimated upon the most luminous galaxies). The
plane redward of the sequence (red zone) is expected to be
mainly populated by higher red-shift galaxies, while the

Moretti et al.: Cluster galaxy LF. Data reduction.

13

Fig. 14. Projected spatial distribution of all (upper panel), bright [r < 20.0) galaxies (central panel), and bright
sequence galaxies (lower panel) . We fit bright galaxies distributions with King functions and we show the two different
core radius best values. Comparison between the upper and central panel suggests a luminosity segregation effect;
comparison between central and lower panel suggest a colour segregation effect. The density profile is obtained as the
average of 36 profiles, and the errors correspond to 1 standard deviation of the 36 values distribution. In the left panel
the dotted lines show 1 e 2 core radius.

blueward zone is likely the locus of cluster and foreground 5.2. Spatial distribution
late-type galaxies.

To further clarify this concept of likely membership we
plot our data in the colour-colour plane, g — r versus g — i
(Fig.n3). The continuous line in the plane represents the
locus of points defined by elliptical galaxies at different
redshifts according to the models of Buzzoni et al.(1993).
These plots are consistent with the previous discussion: a)
the cD galaxy, filled square, is near the expected location
of an E galaxy at the cluster redshift, b) galaxies located
in the red zone of Fig.^ are displayed along the sequence
of higher redshift ellipticals, and c) blue galaxies do not
match the redshift sequence for elliptical galaxies.

The strategy we adopt for the observations has the advan-
tage of allowing measuring fields at a rather large distance,
about 2700 pixels (~ 1275 kpc) from the cluster centre in
a reasonable amount of telescope time. On the other hand
we are forced to select an ad hoc radial direction. That is
we are more sensitive to cluster and background field den-
sity fluctuations. We proceed as follows. First, we build
the density frame relative to the whole mosaic. Then we
divide the density frame in 36 circular sectors centred on
the cluster centre and average the contribution of each seg-
ment at fixed radius going from the centre to the external
limit of the mosaic. The whole sample mean radial surface

14

Moretti et al.: Cluster galaxy LF. Data reduction.

"^I"-' ^

\—
■.\'

'«■■■•■' i.

• 1

RADIUS (arsec)

RADIUS (arsec)

Fig. 15. Spatial distribution of red galaxies (upper panel) and blue galaxies (lower panel) as labelled on the magnitude-
colour plane. Red galaxies do not show any particular behaviour linked to cluster structure. Blue galaxies remarkably
crowd at 1 core radius distance from the centre of the cluster.

Table 10. Best fit values of King function for the distri- structure (Fig, 15 upper panel). Galaxies belonging to the
bution of bright galaxies (r < 20). blue zone of the colour-magnitude plane are identified as

cluster or foreground late type galaxies. Their projected
distribution seems to be influenced by cluster potential:
their density abruptly peaks at 1 core radius distance from
the cluster centre. This effect has been noticed also in some
of the other clusters that we are analysing.

Sample

(70 {W'/sq.'^) Re (arsec) a^ (lO^sg.^)

ALL
SEQUENCE

2.077 ± 0.2 727+38 0.22 ± 0.02
1.807 ±0.2 497^25 0.12 ±0.01

density profile (FigJlJ, upper panel) does not clearly make
evident the excess of galaxies defining the cluster.

Due to the segregation effect of the most luminous
galaxies, r < 20.0, a King profile well fits the density
profile at these magnitudes (Fig.|lJ central panel, and Ta-
ble |l^. The sequence galaxies as defined by the CMR,
with r < 20.0, present a higher central concentration as
indicated by the smaller core radius (Table M). This is
also to be expected in a relaxed cluster since the CMR
sequence has been defined by using the bright elliptical
cluster galaxies.

Galaxies belonging to the red region of colour-
magnitude plane are identified as galaxies at higher red-
shift (see Fig.|l^ and |l^). Their distribution is homoge-
neous over the observed field without any link to cluster

5.3. The central cD galaxy

The cD central galaxy is the brightest member of the clus-
ter: it is 2 magnitudes brighter than the second member.
In Molinari et al. (1998) its luminosity is regarded as too
bright to be consistent with other ellipticals and it is not
included in the computation of LF. However, as seen in
the previous subsection, the cD magnitude and colour are
consistent with the CMR extrapolated from the popula-
tion of the bright ellipticals galaxies.

cD galaxies are generally characterised by a surface
brightness (SB) profile that falls off more slowly with ra-
dius than most elliptical galaxies. In Fig. Il^ the profile of
the Abell 496 cD galaxy along the major axis is shown
up to a distance of 100 arcsec (~ 92 kpc) from the cen-
tre. In this profile the presence of the halo is particularly

Moretti et al.: Cluster galaxy LF. Data reduction.

15

noticeable, it departs strongly from a de Vaucouleur law
(the straight line in the figure). The comparison of the SB
profile along the northern major semi-axis (N) with the
one along the southern semi-axis (S) (Fig. Rq) shows an
evident asymmetry. The N region of the halo exhibits an
excess of intensity with respect to the S in each of the
3 filters in the interval 25-50 arcsec of distance from the
centre . This effect is clearly depicted by the isophotes in
Fig. W^ In spite of the large extension of the halo, this is

Fig. 17. The filter r halo isophotes are superimposed to
the image of the cD galaxy (the North is toward the bot-
tom of the image), the last isophote corresponding to
the SB threshold. The asymmetry of the halo emission
is clearly evident.

RADIUS Carsecl/4}

Fig. 16. The intensity profiles of the cD galaxy of Abell
496 along the N and S major semi-axis are superimposed
(the r and i profiles are shifted of 2 and 4 magnitude to
make the figure clearer). The excess of intensity of the
northern semi-axis is noticeable in the interval (25,50) ar-
sec from the centre. The straight lines represents the de
Vaucouleur profile.

somewhat fainter than the core. After fitting the core by
a de Vaucouleur law, we could subtract it from the cD im-
age and estimate the magnitude of the halo. The derived
total magnitudes in the three filters are listed in Table O.
As already stated, the luminosity of the core is dominant.
The average colour index of the total profile presents a
gradient toward the blue moving from the core to the out-
ermost part of the galaxy. This is due to the colour of
the halo that is bluer than that of the core. Within the
halo itself a difference exists between the colour of the
northern hemisphere of higher surface brightness, and the
colour of the southern hemisphere. The northern zone is
bluer (marked as colour excess in Fig. |l^). In other cD
galaxies (see for instance Molinari et al. 1994) the halo
has been found redder than the core. Therefore, the char-
acteristics of the halo population are undoubtedly related
to the specific history of the cD under consideration.

5.4- Colour gradient of the galaxy population

Finally, the distribution of the g—r colours of the sequence
galaxies is analysed as a function of their projected dis-

. KO

CORE

■

■ O

HALO

o

EXCESS

-

■ o.

-

Kl. °

.

■ *

. K2 J-

o

■

-

-

°° K3

-

. ■*

-

K4

.K5

Fig. 18. The average colour index of the three compo-
nents of the galaxy is shown. They are compared with the
expected colours of the stars convoluted from the spectral
catalogue of Vilnius, Strajzhis & Sviderskene (1972) (stars
are labelled with the name of spectral class) and also with
the colours of the stars of our catalogue (small points) .

tance from the centre of the cluster. We find a significant
correlation relative to the population of faint galaxies.

As partly expected, brighter galaxies tend to dominate
in the central region of the cluster. Such galaxies (see also
the discussion on the CMR relation) tend to be some-
what redder. Therefore we expect a mild correlation be-
tween the cluster integrated colour - defined as the mean
colour derived from the galaxy population located at a

16

Moretti et al.: Cluster galaxy LF. Data reduction.

Table 11. Photometric parameters of the cD galaxy.

F

re (arse)

He (mag/arsC^)

rntot

TTicore

rrihaio

g

58.3 ±7.5

25.81 ±0.12

12.64 ±0.03

12.85 ±0.04

14.56 ± 0.07

r

51.7 ±5.1

25.12 ±0.10

12.04 ±0.02

12.22 ±0.03

13.99 ± 0.06

i

52.7 ±4.9

24.96 ±0.10

11.88 ±0.02

12.05 ±0.03

13.97 ± 0.06

given distance from the centre - and the distance from the
centre. The total gradient expected to be < 0.2 in g — r.
On the other hand if we limit ourselves to consider only
the dwarf galaxies (bottom of Fig.ll^ , we do not measure
any correlation between the mean galaxy magnitude and
the distance from the cluster centre. In spite of this lack
of correlation the faint cluster population shows a well-
defined colour gradient moving outward from the centre
(upper panel of Fig. |l^). This effect is significant at a 4
sigma level and unrelated to the CMR relation. Indeed
over the small range of magnitude we took into consider-
ation (18 < r < 21) such an effect would be at most of
about 0.1 mag, while we observe a gradient of about 0.3
magnitudes.

A very similar result is found by Seeker (1996) in Coma
cluster; conversely, Hilker et al. (1998) do not find any
correlation between the projected distance from the centre
and the colours of dwarf galaxies in the central region of
Fornax cluster.

6. Discussion and conclusion

We started a project whose main goal is the determina-
tion of the cluster Luminosity Function and its relation to
the cluster morphology and population. In this paper we
describe the procedure used for the analysis of the data
using A496 as a test case. The LF of this cluster has been
published in Molinari et al. (1998).

In the present study, examination of the space distri-
bution of the blue galaxies reveals a density peak at about
a core radius ~ 500 arcsec (~ 0.22 Mpc) from the clus-
ter centre. This finding should be related to observation
of a blueing of the galaxy population, beginning from the
cluster centre to its outskirts (Fig. |l^) . This phenomenon,
demonstrated to be independent from the CMR relation
and luminosity segregation, calls for physical differentia-
tion in the galaxy stellar content.

Furthermore, we measure a rather blue cD halo with
a remarkable North-South colour asymmetry. This is dif-
ferent from what has been found, e.g., by Molinari et al.
(1994) who ascribed the very red cD halo was to a MO-
like stellar population, implying that any model deserves
further consideration.

Further work is planned to look for these interesting
features in other clusters and a detailed discussion on the
above results will be given in a forthcoming paper of this
series.

200 300 400

CLUSTER RADIUS (arsec)

200 300 400

CLUSTER RADIUS (arsec)

Fig. 19. The average colour index of dwarf sequence
galaxies shows a gradient from red to blue going off the
centre of the cluster (upper panel). This feature cannot
be ascribed to the luminosity±colour segregation: the non
correlation between radius cluster and medium magnitude
of the dwarf sequence galaxies is shown (lower panel).

Thank are due to K. Sheldt and L. Moretti for some
help with the English proofing.

References

Abell CO., Corwin H.G., Olowin R.P. 1989 ApJS, 70, 1

Arimoto N., Yoshii Y. 1987, A&A 297, 610

Bernstein G.M., Nichol R.C., Tyson J.A., Ulmer M.P.,

Wittman D. 1995, AJ, 110, 1507
Binggeli B., Sandage A., Tamman G.A. 1988 ARA&A, 26, 509

Moretti et al.: Cluster galaxy LF. Data reduction. 17

Biviano A., Durret F., Gerbal D., Le Fevre O., Lobo C,

Mazure A., Slezak E. 1995 A&A 297, 610
Burnstein D., Heiles C. 1982, AJ„ 87, 1165
Buzzoni A., Chincarini G., Molinari E. 1993, ApJ, 410, 499
Buzzoni A. 1995, ApJS 98,69
CoUess M. 1989, MNRAS 237,799
De Grand! S., Molendi S., Bohringer H., Chincarini G., Voges

W., 1997, ApJ, 486, 738
De Grandi S. et al. 1999, ApJ, 514, in press
De Propris R., Pritchet C.J., 1988, AJ, 116, 1118
Gunn J.E., Hoessel J.G., Oke J.B., 1986, ApJ, 306, 30
Garilli B., Bottini D., Maccagni D., Carrasco L., Recillas E.,

1996, ApJs 105, 91

Hilker M. et al. 1999, A&AS, 134, 75

Lopez-Cruz O., Yee H.K.C., Brown J. P., Jones C, Forman W.,

1997, APJL, 101, 97L

Metcalfe N., Godwin J.G., Peach J.V., 1994 MNRAS 267, 431
Molinari E., Buzzoni A., Chincarini G., Pedrana, M.D., 1995,

A&A 292, 54
Molinari E., Smareglia, 1998 A&AS 330, 447
Molinari E., Buzzoni A., Chincarini G., 1996, A&AS, 119, 391
Molinari E., Chincarini G., Moretti A., De Grandi S., 1998,

A&A 338, 874, Paper I
Robin A. et al. 1995

bttp://WWW. obsbesancon.fr/

/www/inodele/modele_ang.html

Sarazin C.L. 1988, X-ray emission from cluster of galaxies. As-
trophysics Series, Cambridge University Press, New York

Seeker J., 1996 ApJL, 469, L81

Strajzhis V. & Sviderskene Z., 1972 Bull. Vilnius astr Obs. 35,1

Thuan T.X., Gunn J.E. 1976, PASP, 88, 543

Trentham N., 1997, MNRAS, 290, 334

Trentham N., 1998, MNRAS, 294, 193

Visvanathan N., Sandage A. 1977 ApJ, 216, 214

Wade R.A., Hoessel J.G., Ehas J.H., Huchra J.P. 1979 PASP,
91, 35

Withmore B.C., Gilmore D.M. 1991 ApJ, 367, 64

West R.M., Kruszewski A., 1981, Irish Astron. J. 15, 25